![\"Climate](\"http:\/\/www.tomgrimshaw.com\/tomsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Climate_Lie_Debunked-300x261.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
An article in\u00a0TIME Magazine<\/em>\u00a0(TIME<\/em>) claims that January 2024 was the hottest ever on record for the planet. Titled,\u00a02024 Had the Hottest January on Record Following 2023\u2019s Hottest Year on Record<\/a>\u00a0the article is based on a single source of temperature data.<\/p>\n Data from multiple other sources of temperature measurements refute this claim. [emphasis, links added]<\/p>\n TIME<\/em>\u00a0refers to the Copernicus EU climate service as the source for its alarming claim. Copernicus EU\u00a0issued a press release claiming<\/a>:<\/p>\n January 2024 was the warmest January on record globally, with an average ERA5 surface air temperature of 13.14\u00b0C, 0.70\u00b0C above the 1991-2020 average for January and 0.12\u00b0C above the temperature of the previous warmest January, in 2020.<\/p>\n The month was 1.66\u00b0C warmer than an estimate of the January average for 1850-1900, the designated pre-industrial reference period.<\/p>\n For example,\u00a0NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies<\/a>\u00a0(GISS) produced a map of the globe that\u00a0shows a significantly lower global temperature for January 2024<\/a>.<\/p>\n The GISS global value was just 1.20\u00b0C compared to the 1.66\u00b0C claimed by Copernicus is different because\u00a0NASA GISS is using a base period of 1951 to 1980.<\/strong><\/p>\n Copernicus seemingly cherry-picked the reference period to fit the\u00a0climate crisis narrative<\/a><\/strong>, and\u00a0TIME<\/em>\u00a0was too uninterested in seeking and presenting the truth to investigate the extraordinary claim, instead\u00a0reporting it as\u00a0an unchallenged fact<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n When you look at satellite temperature data\u00a0compiled by the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH)<\/a>, the \u201chottest January ever\u201d claim also falls apart:<\/p>\n The satellite\u2019s global temperature value is just 0.86\u00b0C, essentially half of what Copernicus claims at 1.66\u00b0C.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n While it is not the globe, the United States (U.S.) is often cited as being a leading metric for climate change by both media and scientific sources. This is because the\u00a0U.S. has\u00a0more temperature stations<\/a>\u00a0per land area<\/strong>\u00a0than any other region included in the global climatological network.<\/p>\n As such, its readings have an\u00a0outsized impact<\/a>\u00a0on global average temperature measurements.<\/p>\n Yet when you\u00a0examine the data from the US Climate Reference Network (USCRN)<\/a>, the best and most state-of-the-art surface measurement system in the world, we find that\u00a0not only was January 2024 not the hottest on the record it was below normal in temperature:<\/strong><\/p>\n At -0.14\u00b0F (-0.08\u00b0C), there is certainly no cause for alarm about temperature in the United States.\u00a0Yet\u00a0TIME<\/em>\u00a0does not mention any of these other sources.<\/strong><\/p>\n It gets worse than the simple subversion of science by omission of critical facts.\u00a0TIME\u00a0<\/em>quoted a spokesperson for Copernicus in the article:<\/p>\n \u201cRapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are the only way to stop global temperatures increasing<\/strong>,\u201d Samantha Burgess, deputy director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, said in a statement.<\/p>\n That statement is\u00a0nothing more than\u00a0political advocacy<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0calling for the reduction of greenhouse gases through\u00a0restrictions of economies<\/a>, rather than simply reporting the science. By using that quote,\u00a0TIME<\/em>\u00a0is complicit in\u00a0pushing advocacy over science<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n\nThe problem with that is that <\/span>they are using a reference period of 1850 to 1900 that no other climate data source uses<\/strong>; a period, not coincidentally, more than 100 years of global warming ago when the Earth was cooler than today.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n